BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

192 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 10B(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Kolkata196Mumbai192Delhi116Chennai94Bangalore81Ahmedabad77Pune70Hyderabad53Jaipur41Cuttack28Indore24Lucknow23Chandigarh17Visakhapatnam15Surat15Rajkot13Nagpur11Jabalpur10Jodhpur8Cochin8Patna7Agra6Amritsar5Panaji5Varanasi4Guwahati3Dehradun3Raipur3Allahabad2Calcutta2Ranchi1Karnataka1Himachal Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 11231Section 143(1)141Section 12A76Exemption76Addition to Income54Section 11(2)48Condonation of Delay47Section 25043Section 139(1)

JAN SEVA MANDAL ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD -1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statisti...

ITA 3445/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2023-24 Jan Seva Mandal, Central Processing Centre Income Vinayalaya, Mahakali Caves Tax Deparment, Bengaluru, Vs. Road, Andheri (East), Income Tax Officer Exemption Mumbai-400093. Ward 1(4), Mumbai. 6Th Floor, Mtnl Te Building, Pedder Road, Mumbai-400026. Pan No. Aaatj 4868 K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Ketan PatelFor Respondent: Mr. Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)

10B and was advised to approach the jurisdictional Principal and was advised to approach the jurisdictional Principal and was advised to approach the jurisdictional Principal Commissioner or Chief Commissioner for condonation of delay Commissioner or Chief Commissioner for condonation of delay Commissioner or Chief Commissioner for condonation of delay under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act. under Section

Showing 1–20 of 192 · Page 1 of 10

...
40
Section 143(3)39
Charitable Trust39
Disallowance38

SHREE PUSHKAR FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION)-WARD 2(30, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2714/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2021-22 Shree Pushkar Foundation, Ito (Exemption) – Ward 2(3), 301/302, 3Rd Floor, Cumbala Hill Tele Exchange Atlanta Centre, Vs. (Mtnl), Peddar Rd, Tardeo, Near Udyog Bhavan, Mumbai-400026. Sonawala Road, Goregaon East, Mumbai-400063. Pan No. Aawts 2303 N Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Sandip S. Nagar, &For Respondent: 24/07/2024
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

10B & 10BB for AY 2018-19 or for any subsequent Assessment Years 19 or for any subsequent Assessment Years, , where there is the delay of up to 365 days and decide on merits the delay of up to 365 days and decide on merits after considering after considering reasonable cause for delay. The relevant circular in relation to form reasonable

SHA HURGOWAN ANANDJI DESAI CHARITIES ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC , BENGULURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee

ITA 2807/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2022-23 Sha Hurgowan Anandji Desai Dy. Director Of Income-Tax, Cpc Charities, Bengaluru, 18, Bhaskar Lane, Bhuleshwar, Vs. Income Tax Officer Exemption Mumbai-400002. Ward 2(3), 6Th Floor, Mtnl Te Building Pedder Road, Mumbai-400026. Pan No. Aaats 0405 R Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Ms. Vasanti Patel, &
Section 11

delay may kindly be condoned and the benefits of Section 11 be granted to the condoned and the benefits of Section 11 be granted to the condoned and the benefits of Section 11 be granted to the Appellant. Appellant. 4. 4. Without prejudice to the above, 4. Without prejudice to the above, it is submitted that on the facts

GETINGE MEDICAL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(2)(1), MUMBAI MAHARASHTRA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 4872/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

Section 115Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 156Section 234ASection 270ASection 37Section 41Section 41(1)(a)

10B is distinguishable. In such cases, the filing of the audit report is a foundational condition for claiming exemption, and the authority’s power to condone delay was expressly circumscribed by a circular prescribing an outer time limit. In the present case, however, there is no statutory embargo providing that delayed filing of Form 10-IC, automatically invalidates an option

AADIVASI WELFARE FOUNDATION,JHARKHAND vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD 1(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2870/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhary & Shri Gagan Goyalaadivasi Welfare Foundation, Plot No. 8185, Sri Krishna Road, Near Srinath University, Dindli Basti, Majhitola, Adityapur, Pan No. Aarca5995N ...... Appellant Vs. Ao (Exem.) Ward-1(1), Pratistha Bhavan, Church Gate, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Venkata Anil, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 246Section 250

condonation of delay in filing Form 10B” 4. The Assessee being aggrieved with this order preferred the present appeal before us. We have gone through the order passed by the AO under section 143(1

CAREGIVER SAATHI FOUNDATION,GOREGAON MUMBAI vs. DY.DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX CPC BENGLURU, DY.DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX CPC BENGLURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4002/MUM/2024[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2022-23 Caregiver Saathi Foundation, Dy. Cit, Cpc 1703, Sienna Tower Wing-B, Lodha Bengluru-560100. Vs. Florenza, Western Express Highway N Ext, To Hub Mall, Goregaon, Mumbai-400063. Pan No. Aaicc 5644 B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: 14/01/2025
Section 11Section 139Section 139(1)

section 11(1) of the IT Act. The appellant ITA No. 4002/MUM/2024 3 Caregiver Saathi Foundation Caregiver Saathi Foundation filed return of income along with audit report in for filed return of income along with audit report in for filed return of income along with audit report in form 10B on same day i.e.28/03/2023. 10B on same day i.e.28/03/2023

SHREE DADAR JAIN PAUSHADHSHALA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E_ - 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 2061/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Aug 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2061/Mum/2019 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) बिाम/ Shree Dadar Jain Ito(E)-1(2) Paushadhshala Trust, Room No. 501, 5 Th Floor, Aaradhana Bhavan, Piramal Chambers, V. 289, S K Bole Road, Lalbaug, Parel, Dadar West, Mumbai-400012 Mumbai-400028 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaats7848E (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri. Bhadresh Doshi Revenue By: Shri. Abhi Rama Karthikeyn S. सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 03.06.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.08.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Assessee, Being Ita No. 2061/Mum/2019, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 08/02/2019, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called ―The Cit(A)‖) In Appeal Number Cit(A)-3/It-10394/2017-18, For Assessment Year 2014-15, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From Assessment Order Dated 28.12.2006 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called ―The Ao‖) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ―The Act‖) For Ay:2014-15. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By Assessee In Memo Of Appeal Filed With The Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called ―The Tribunal‖) Read As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri. Bhadresh DoshiFor Respondent: Shri. Abhi Rama Karthikeyn S
Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

delay in filing Form No. 10 electronically. The assessee submitted that only ground for denial of deduction u/s 11(2) of the 1961 Act was non filing of Form No. 10 electronically in time before expiry of time allowed u/s 139(1) of the 1961 Act. The assessee claimed that Section 11(2) of the 1961 Act which provide

ROTARY CLUB OF BOMBAY QUEENS NECKLACE CHARITABLE TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 8306/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Bijayananda Prusethrotary Club Of Bombay Vs Ito (Exem.) Ward 2(2), Mumbai Queens Necklace Charitable Aayakar Bhawan, M.K. Road Trust Mumbai-400020 B 41/45, Paragon Centre, Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli, Mumbai-400013 Pan: Aaatr4200K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PatelFor Respondent: Shri Bhagirath Ramawat (SR DR)
Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

1, is hereby quashed and set aside. Consequently, the delay in filing Form 10B for the A.Y. 2021-22 is also hereby condoned. 16. Now that the delay is condoned, the intimation issued under Section

FRANSALIAN SOCIETY NALLASOPARA,VASAI THANE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD - 1(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

The appeal of the appellant is dismissed

ITA 380/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am)

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(2)(a)Section 11(2)(c)Section 119(2)(b)Section 13(1)Section 139(1)Section 139(4)

Section 119 to avoid genuine hardship in the matter of filing of audit report in Form 10B has issued various circulars empowering the authorities at the level of CITs and above to condone the delay in filing of Form 10B for A.Y.2016-17 and subsequent years, then such authorities should only can condone the delay following the judicial precedents laid down

LOKUMAL KISHINCHAND CHARITY TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assesseeis allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1267/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Lokumal Kishinchand Charity Trust Ito Exemption Ward-1(4), 629-A, Gazdar House, 3Rd Floor, Vs Mumbai J Shanker Seth Marg, Dhobi Talao, Mumbai – 400002. [Pan No. Aaatl2570L] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 254(1)Section 44A

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the bonafide delay in filing the present appeal may kindly be condoned and the appeal may kindly be heard and decided on merits as the delay in filing the appeal is for valid and sufficient reasons. 2. It is submitted that the Appellant sought redressal of the issue

ANA CHARITABLE TRUST,THANE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, THANE, THANE

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 58/MUM/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jul 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya , CAFor Respondent: ShriManoj Kumar Sinha (SR.DR.)
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 250

1) is retained as the assessing officer also has no power to condone the delay in filing of the return and audit report. The appellant can file a condonation petition before the appropriate authority to condone the delay in filing of return and audit report.” 5. We heard the rival submissions and considered the documents available on record. First

DAMANI WELFARE AND CULTURAL ASSOCIATION,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 3150/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 119(2)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 44ASection 8

1)(a) on the ground that audit report had been filed late. The assessee vide petition dated 26/12/2022 filed on 27/12/2022 before the CIT (Exemption) applied for condonation of delay in filing of form 10B stating as under:- “The assessee is the Section

THE BOMBAY ST. XAVIERS ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD 2(4), MUMBAI

ITA 3643/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti B. PatelFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)

Section 11 of the Act claimed in the return of income for the Assessment Year 2023-2024 on the ground delayed filing of Form 10B. 18. It was submitted by Learned Authorized Representative for the Assessee that the only difference in the facts was that the application seeking condonation of delay in filing Form No.10B for the Assessment Year

THE BOMBAY ST. XAVIERS SOCIETY ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD 2(4), MUMBAI

ITA 1266/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti B. PatelFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)

Section 11 of the Act claimed in the return of income for the Assessment Year 2023-2024 on the ground delayed filing of Form 10B. 18. It was submitted by Learned Authorized Representative for the Assessee that the only difference in the facts was that the application seeking condonation of delay in filing Form No.10B for the Assessment Year

JV FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 181/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (Sr. DR)
Section 11Section 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 44A

condonation of delay for filing Form 10B through order dated 27.06.2024. The assessee had not filed appeal before this order. The CIT(A) dismissed assessee's appeal against which assessee is in appeal before ITAT. Following facts have been highlighted for taking due cognizance while deciding appeal: 1. Delay in filing Form 10B: 1223 days (filed on 24.01.2018) 2. Delay

J V FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 182/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (Sr. DR)
Section 11Section 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 44A

condonation of delay for filing Form 10B through order dated 27.06.2024. The assessee had not filed appeal before this order. The CIT(A) dismissed assessee's appeal against which assessee is in appeal before ITAT. Following facts have been highlighted for taking due cognizance while deciding appeal: 1. Delay in filing Form 10B: 1223 days (filed on 24.01.2018) 2. Delay

ST. THOMAS CHURCH,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for the statistical purposes

ITA 296/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सुं./Ita No. 296/Mum/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2022-23) St Thomas Church V/S. Income Tax Officer 1, Church Road, बिाम (Exemptions) Ward 2(4), Goregaon (East), Mumbai Mumbai 400063 6Th Floor, Cumballa Hill, Mtnl Te Building, Pedder Road, Mumbai 400026. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaatt4878R Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवादी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By: Ms. Vasanti Patel-Adv राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel-AdvFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, CIT DR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12A(1)(ac)Section 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 250

delay may kindly be condoned and the benefits of section 11 be granted to the Appellant. 1.4. It is submitted that the said Audit Report in Form 10B was available on record when the e-Return of income was processed under section 143(1

ST. FRANCIS XAVIER CHURCH,PANVEL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), THANE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5883/MUM/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Justice (Retd.) Shri C.V. Bhadang & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year : 2024-25 St. Francis Xavier Church Trust, Income Tax Officer, Plot 379/B, Behind Orion Mall Exemption Ward, Thane & S.T. Depot, Vs. Quershi Mansion, Panvel-410206. Gokhale Road, Pan : Aaets4913N Naupada, Thane-400602. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : None For Revenue : Smt. B. Brahma Vidya Date Of Hearing : 25-11-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25-11-2025 O R D E R Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Addl/Jcit(A)-Agra, Dated 29-07-2025, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2024-25, Wherein The Assessee Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1.1. On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)] Erred In Confirming The Denial Of Exemption/Deductions Under Section 11 Of The Act Resorted To By The Centralized Processing Centre [Cpc), Income Tax Department, Bengaluru (The Learned Assessing Officer) While Processing The Return Of Income Under Section 143(1) Of The Act On The Grounds That The Audit Report In Form 10-Bb Was Filed Belatedly, Though With The Return Of Income Which Was Filed Within The Extended Time Limit Under Section 139(1) Of The Act.

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Smt. B. Brahma Vidya
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 11(6)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

condone the delay in filing Form No. 10B and direct the Assessing Officer to grant the benefit of exemption under sections 11 and 12 in accordance with law. 17. Accordingly, the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to recompute the income of the assessee after granting exemption under section II and treating

THE MARKET RESERCH SOCIETY OF INDIA ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5088/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 234B

section 11(1) of the Act, the assessee filed a revised Form 10B on 22.05.2023. The assessee in response notice issued by the CIT(A), submitted the details of petition filed before the CIT(Exemptions) for condoning the delay

SNEHASADAN ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD 2(3), MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2525/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kuamr Chauhan, Jm

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(6)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

Section 12A(1)(b) of the Act read with Rule 17B of the Income Tax Rules. However, the Ld. CIT(A) has observed that the assessee is free to file the said Form 10B online and/or approach the CIT-(Exemption), Ahmedabad after filing Form 10B electronically and to condone the delay